Comments On: Gun Nuts and Product Recalls
by Chicago Fanhttp://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/25/gun-nuts-and-product-recalls
Comments On: Gun Nuts and Product Recalls
by Chicago Fanen-usCopyright 2016 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger.webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster)Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:01 -0800Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:15:00 -0800Foundationhttp://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
You did a Google search and came back with one link? That's it?

Gosh, you're soooooo liberal.

Why do you even feel the need to lie like this? Just express yourself without having to use "...and I'm a liberal!" as some kind of rhetorical flourish. Like your pro-NRA beliefs need cover or something. Quit pretending, you big phony.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:06:25 -0800The Stranger
Jesus can blow me.

Now fuck off.
Posted by CPN]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:34:35 -0800The Stranger
I'm all ears. Tell me all about why you love Diane Feinstein. This should be good.

I really want to know who you think you're fooling but for now I'd love to hear you try to convincingly explain what you think is so wonderful about Senator Feinstein. Remember, Jesus is listening.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:17:17 -0800The Stranger
(sigh. facepalm.)

I swore I'd never respond to anything you posted ever again, but in this case you are partially right.

I can't think of 50 reasons why I love Diane Feinstein, I can think of 1000. She is on her way to being a liberal lion in the U.S. Senate and will probably be remembered as the female Ted Kennedy when the smoke of history finally clears.

Regarding gun control, she is wrong. And I will continue to oppose it.

Now go away, again.
Posted by CPN]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:09:44 -0800The Stranger
Yeaaaaah. Can you give any examples of the liberalism that you so love an admire here on Slog?

I'd really like to know what you think you gain by pretending to be a liberal. Who do you think you're fooling?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:09:41 -0800The Stranger
You're going to have to stop making sense PDQ, because that shit doesn't fly around here when it comes to guns.

The people you cite as the first you've encountered as ones who make sense is no doubt true, but that's because this 'debate' has been going on ad nauseam since I started actively participating back around November.

I suspect that many of the voices of reason are suffering from gun-control fatigue and are just burned out. I know I am.

It was always going to be a monumental notion, posting anything pro-gun on what is probably the most left-wing utopian hippie blog in the nation.

Still, it has been enlightening. I've learned that my liberal brethren aren't always right about everything and can be just as irrational and obstinate as the poorest, dumbest slack-jawed redneck.

Still, I SLOG on. Because they are my people and they are wrong on this issue.
Posted by CPN]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:59:29 -0800The Stranger
Most gun owners support universal background checks, trigger locks, liability insurance, research into gun violence, limits on magazine size, and the assault weapons ban. Most gun owners are not gun nuts.

The ones who are nuts are those who follow the NRA's batshit crazy bullshit. Most NRA members don't even agree with the crazy NRA agenda. Which is... nuts. Crazy. Why would you be a member of a crazy organization that advocates things that you think are wrong?

And no, this this debate should never for one second forget the emotion and pain that is behind it. When my child is killed, I care about a hell of a lot more than "honoring" my lost child. I want my fucking child back. Full stop. Does that put you in an awkward position? Too fucking bad, you big baby.

"Honoring" is one of the tactics right wingers use to change the subject when they don't want to pay a bill. Like when a progressive wants to expand veteran's benefits or military family services, and the GOP says, "No fuck that. Too expensive. Now let's go honor our beloved veterans with a couple of cheap yellow ribbons and this crappy Kid Rock song..."

Honor is as honor does. Words don't mean shit. You have to do things that count.

Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:05:42 -0800The Stranger
But surely as an avowed liberal you can think of 50 other reasons why you love Diane Feinstein. Am I right?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:56:43 -0800The Stranger
You are fucking rad! I want people like you studying this issue. Your words are without emotion, well thought out, and logical. I agree it is a public health issue. You are the first person that understands that it is a long-term solution that is needed that may involve things that don't seem, but are actually relevant. I fully agree with all your common sense ideas. A New Deal that looks at this from a birds eye view is what is needed. The issue may have little to do with guns. It may have everything to do with guns. I don't know. But I believe the problem is far more complex than banning capacities and assault type weapons. I'm inclined to think the issues are less about guns and more about culture (and no, not gun culture). Our best hope may be in educating our children, extensively, on this issue. Poverty is significant in this discussion. Mental health is not as relevant. Mentally ill people are significantly less likely to behave violently towards another person, but more likely to harm themselves. Demonization of the mentally ill will only harm an already marginalized group of Americans. We need solutions, not emotions. We need Spok.
Posted by scratchmaster joe]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:17:00 -0800The Stranger
WHERE IS SPOK WHEN YOU NEED HIM!!!
I am ready to be convinced by a good argument, but I need a lecture from someone not emotionally attached to this issue.
Posted by scratchmaster joe]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:02:28 -0800The Stranger
But the 20 first graders were killed by a handgun, not one of the types of guns that appear on most of today's "ban these guns" lists.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:22:35 -0800The Stranger
Posted by Max Solomon]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:53:11 -0800The Stranger
a. ban ALL firearms, confiscate ALL existing.
or
b. ban the sale of certain (additional) TYPES of firearms to the general public.

@16: a "vanishingly small number of deaths" that includes 20 first graders, and that would be seen as a major public health crisis in any other developed country.
Posted by Max Solomon]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:52:26 -0800The Stranger
a. ban ALL firearms, confiscate ALL existing.
or
b. ban the sale of certain (additional) TYPES of firearms to the general public.

@16: a "vanishingly small number of deaths" that includes 20 first graders, and that would be seen as a major public health crisis in any other developed country.
Posted by Max Solomon]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:52:26 -0800The Stranger
Posted by drewm1980]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:39:57 -0800The Stranger
Huh? No one is trying to "ban guns?" Really?

That sure sounds like a ban to me. I wonder if the final bill will mirror her similar ban in California, where you're exempt from the ban if you're filming a movie.

No hypocrisy there.

Posted by CPN]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:07:15 -0800The Stranger
If you really want to reduce that 30K a year figure, you're going to have to go after handguns. Every one of the highly publicized murders in Seattle last year was committed with a handgun. The tobacco comparison here is apt, it would take decades and a multi-generational campaign to change the public's attitudes and make handguns illegal.
Posted by Westside forever]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:22:08 -0800The Stranger
Posted by catsnbanjos]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:00:44 -0800The Stranger
Posted by Micah]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:43:59 -0800The Stranger
BTW, You don't have a Constitutional right to own a crib. You do have a Constitutional right however to keep and bear arms and say a bunch of stupid shit here on the Slog.
Posted by GeneStoner]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:41:04 -0800The Stranger
Posted by smade]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:37:47 -0800The Stranger
we already REGULATE firearms, but tighter REGULATIONS for responsibilities of the keeping and bearing of firearms are possible. of course, not to the point of "infringing" on the right to do so in the 1st place.

after all, you gotta be able to call out the militia to put down those slave rebellions.
Posted by Max Solomon]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:17:58 -0800The Stranger
Perhaps this past year and the outspoken lunacy of the NRA will mark a turnaround in that fact. If it does, I fully expect the gun lobby to be just as neutered as the tobacco lobby, and lawmakers will actually start to see an upside to supporting gun control measures.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:54:49 -0800The Stranger
Posted by _db_]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:28:01 -0800The Stranger
I don't get it.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]>
Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:14:50 -0800The Stranger